AI assistants have been shown to be “inaccurate and evidently prejudiced” when offering voting advice, the Netherlands’ data watchdog has reported, issuing warnings about a potential threat to democratic processes just eight days before national elections.
Testing Reveals Consistent Bias in AI Suggestions
The quartet of AI assistants tested by the authority “often end up with the same two parties”, irrespective of the user’s question or command, the watchdog noted in a report published ahead of the 29 October election.
In more than half of the cases, the chatbot suggested either the right-wing PVV of the politician Geert Wilders or the leftwing GroenLinks-PvdA headed by the ex-EU commissioner Frans Timmermans.
Certain groups, such as the centre-right CDA, “are rarely ever cited”, even when the user’s input exactly matches the stances of these political entities, the report indicated.
Authority Figure Cautions Against Relying on AI Assistants for Voting Guidance
The deputy head of the AP, the official Monique Verdier, commented that while chatbots may seem like clever tools, “as a voting aid, they consistently fail”. Citizens were being steered toward a party that might not correspond to their political views, she added.
“This directly impacts a cornerstone of democracy: the integrity of free and fair elections,” said Verdier. “We thus caution against using AI chatbots for voting advice, as their functioning is opaque and difficult to verify.”
Election Context and Party Dynamics
Netherlands citizens vote on October 29 in an electoral contest that will be closely watched across the continent for the showing of the Freedom party.
The far-right party of Wilders is ahead in surveys but the gap to the left-wing and centre-right parties seems to be closing, with many voters still undecided.
Every significant political faction have rejected a coalition with the PVV, implying the runner-up party is most likely to provide the next prime minister.
Inadvertent Prejudice Linked to AI Operation
The AP stressed that the AI systems were not intentionally prejudiced, and that their “noted flaws” are a result of the way AI chatbots operate.
